These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32735624)
21. Some sex differences in sentencing severity for a mock crime scenario. McKelvie SJ Psychol Rep; 2007 Jun; 100(3 Pt 1):894-6. PubMed ID: 17688108 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A jury of scientists: Formal education in biobehavioral sciences reduces the odds of punitive criminal sentencing. Thomaidou MA; Berryessa CM Behav Sci Law; 2022 Nov; 40(6):787-817. PubMed ID: 35978472 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Relation of affect control theory to the sentencing of criminals. Tsoudis O J Soc Psychol; 2000 Aug; 140(4):473-85. PubMed ID: 10981376 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Revising a priority list based on cost-effectiveness: the role of the prominence effect and distorted utility judgments. Baron J; Ubel PA Med Decis Making; 2001; 21(4):278-87. PubMed ID: 11475384 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. On informing jurors of potential sanctions. Teitcher J; Scurich N Law Hum Behav; 2017 Dec; 41(6):579-587. PubMed ID: 28816465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The effect of neuroscientific evidence on sentencing depends on how one conceives of reasons for incarceration. Perricone A; Baskin-Sommers A; Ahn WK PLoS One; 2022; 17(11):e0276237. PubMed ID: 36322534 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Sentencing convicted juvenile felony offenders in the adult court: the direct effects of race. Howell RJ; Hutto TS Behav Sci Law; 2012; 30(6):782-99. PubMed ID: 22592862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Drug offence sentencing practices in the United States of America. Weissman JC Bull Narc; 1984; 36(3):27-41. PubMed ID: 6570649 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Reconciling the opposing effects of neurobiological evidence on criminal sentencing judgments. Allen CH; Vold K; Felsen G; Blumenthal-Barby JS; Aharoni E PLoS One; 2019; 14(1):e0210584. PubMed ID: 30657761 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Issues pertaining to expert evidence and the reasoning about punishment in a neuroscience-based sentencing appeal. McCay A; Ryan CJ Int J Law Psychiatry; 2019; 65():101409. PubMed ID: 30591221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Risk and resources: A qualitative perspective on low-level sentencing in Virginia. Metz A; Monahan J; Garrett B; Siebert L J Community Psychol; 2019 Jul; 47(6):1476-1492. PubMed ID: 31090080 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender. Feather NT; Souter J Law Hum Behav; 2002 Aug; 26(4):417-38. PubMed ID: 12182531 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The effect of retributive and restorative sentencing on psychological effects of criminal proceedings. Laxminarayan M J Interpers Violence; 2013 Mar; 28(5):938-55. PubMed ID: 23079937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The double-edged sword: does biomechanism increase or decrease judges' sentencing of psychopaths? Aspinwall LG; Brown TR; Tabery J Science; 2012 Aug; 337(6096):846-9. PubMed ID: 22904010 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The double-edged sword of genetic accounts of criminality: causal attributions from genetic ascriptions affect legal decision making. Cheung BY; Heine SJ Pers Soc Psychol Bull; 2015 Dec; 41(12):1723-38. PubMed ID: 26498975 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Nature, nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic-environment interaction, future dangerousness, and deliberation affect sentencing decisions. Gordon N; Greene E Behav Sci Law; 2018 Jan; 36(1):65-83. PubMed ID: 28881042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Actuarial risk assessment at sentencing: Potential consequences for mass incarceration and legitimacy. O'Hear M Behav Sci Law; 2020 May; 38(3):193-206. PubMed ID: 32215954 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Sex offender punishment and the persistence of penal harm in the U.S. Leon CS Int J Law Psychiatry; 2011; 34(3):177-85. PubMed ID: 21592578 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The guilty mind and criminal sentencing: integrating legal and empirical inquiry as illustrated by capital sentencing. Schopp RF; Patry MW Behav Sci Law; 2003; 21(5):631-51. PubMed ID: 14502693 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]